-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 7:38 AM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Re: MPIR 2.6 release progress
I fixed the bug in tuneup. So here is the list of items for release now:
todo:
==========
mpir build fails on MinGW due to mpn_addmul_2 symbol defined twice Pavel
mpz_powm_ui doc says -ve exponent supported, which is rubbish
fix flint bugs in primality testing code
interface for mpn_mulmod_2expp1
32 and 64 bit tuning for fft
remove old fft tuning params
t-next_likely_prime undefined reference to abort and exit
fft_combine_bits const warning (see below)
../mpn/generic/gcdext.c:238: warning: integer overflow in expression
const warning:
==============
In file included from mul_truncate_sqrt2.c:2:
../fft/mul_truncate_sqrt2.c: In function ā__gmpn_mul_truncate_sqrt2ā:
../fft/mul_truncate_sqrt2.c:113: warning: passing argument 2 of
ā__fft_combine_bitsā from
incompatible pointer type
../mpir.h:1860: note: expected āconst mp_limb_t **ā but argument is of
type āmp_limb_t **ā
Done:
=====
remove old fft tuning code
add new fft crossover code to tuneup
tuneup fails on mpir-exp branch
Wont Fix:
=========
Vlad report of MinGW sandybridge combination with FFT assert failure -
new fft fixes this
Chris report of mpz_get_ux failure on Itanium - this is a compiler bug
Next Release:
=============
generic build option for sage
proper tuning code for mpn_mul_Bexpp1_fft
fft/fft_negacyclic.c is misspelled
move fft_tuning.c into tuneup
=============================
Great to see the progress you are making Bill.
I think there are a few further issues that need resolving:
1. The windows command line build needs testing and, possibly, correcting.
I think Case volunteered to do this (can you do this Case?)
2. Rob reported that support for _Decimal64 is now a GMP feature that MPIR
doesn't offer in GMP compatibility mode on mingw/mingw64. We need a
volunteer to add this or it needs to go onto the todo list for the next
release.
3. Now that the Python build generator for Visual Studio builds is robust,
I intend to deliver the Visual Studio build solution with fewer initial
build options since the user can add those that they need. I would like to
offer win32 and x64 builds for both static libraries and DLLS for: (a)
generic C, and (b) an assembler version that works on all x64 enables
processors.
Does anyone have any advice on which existing assembler version meets
requirement (b)? That is, which of the existing assembler builds can serve
as a generic assembler build for all Intel/AMD processors that can run
Windows x64?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
